Introduction: Hello from The Netherlands!

daantje20

Cadet
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
3
From the end of 2017 till recently I have been using a NAS. As a Support Professional (yay for buzzwords) in the software industry I am not really an engineer of sorts.
The Synology NAS served me well, but I was seeking a middle ground between good storage solution and flexibility of adding on extra services.

So after some searching I took the plunge and ordered myself some components and do a TrueNAS Core my own way. (I had tried to work with a Linux based solution too).

Hardware (600 euros):
CPU: Intel Core i3 - 9100
Platform: Asrock DeskMini 310
RAM: 16 GB (Crucial CT2K8G4SFRA266)
Data Storage: 2x WD20SPZX (2 TB 2.5" SMR)
System drive: Crucial P2 256GB

As you can see from the above none of it is recommended, no ECC RAM and SMR disks, completely bonkers. But my word does it run well. I do run backups with duplicati, so if things go south I will have a copy of the most important files.

Tinkering with computers is good fun, for me the NAS is quite serious but I wanted small en relatively quiet solution. I am almost 40 years old and I have a wife and two kids (5 and 3 years old). Next to a 40h/w dayjob there is little time left to tinker.

Feel free to comment, I can take it. Thank you ixsystems for making this great software available to tinkerers and homelabs.
 

ornias

Wizard
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
1,458
As you can see from the above none of it is recommended, no ECC RAM and SMR disks, completely bonkers. But my word does it run well. I do run backups with duplicati, so if things go south I will have a copy of the most important files.
SMR runs well, till you need to run a rebuild. Then shit hits the fan.
 

Arwen

MVP
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
3,600
@daantje20 - Just be cautious of SMR from Western Digital. The WD Red SMRs, (3.5" drives), seemed to have a bug in the firmware that only ZFS would trigger. If I understand the issue correctly, it had to do with a feature of ZFS where it would combine more than 1 read into a single read, which would encompass blocks in the middle that were not previously written. The WD Red SMR 3.5" would return an error, would would cause ZFS to perform error recovery.

In essence, the WD Red SMR 3.5" disk was NOT acting like a normal drive. In the case of a normal drive, you can read any block just fine, whether you have written to it or not. So ZFS could implement it a combined multiple read, even for blocks not previously written.
 

daantje20

Cadet
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
3
@daantje20 - Just be cautious of SMR from Western Digital. The WD Red SMRs, (3.5" drives), seemed to have a bug in the firmware that only ZFS would trigger. If I understand the issue correctly, it had to do with a feature of ZFS where it would combine more than 1 read into a single read, which would encompass blocks in the middle that were not previously written. The WD Red SMR 3.5" would return an error, would would cause ZFS to perform error recovery.

In essence, the WD Red SMR 3.5" disk was NOT acting like a normal drive. In the case of a normal drive, you can read any block just fine, whether you have written to it or not. So ZFS could implement it a combined multiple read, even for blocks not previously written.
So how would such an error look in a log? I would have had those errors already then, it's been running for more than 10 days. Although there is only 27% use of the 2tb at this stage.
 

Arwen

MVP
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
3,600
@daantje20 I don't remember.

In theory, if you tested the disks with "badblocks" or other full disk write, that particular error should not show up. Or it's possible that the 2TB 2.5" SMR disks you are using don't have the same firmware bug as the WD Red 3.5" SMR disks.

But, such an obvious firmware bug makes me nervous that other bugs may be lurking.

Edit: I found a reference to the bug. Reading a sector not previously written would return the error IDNF, (IDentification Not Found, I think). If I understand what they are attempting to show, is that the sector is not found.
 
Last edited:
Top